Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think I call BS on this. There are some data that's not right, from what I saw.
When you say this, "DC proper is now growing faster than the region as a whole", you need to back this up with a study. Because, although it's nice, it causes issues.
Where is the transportation data, or job data, spending data, or even a marriage data for first time home owner data??
Listen, it's not as simple as people tell you it is.
Maybe "faster" isn't the right word, but rather "disproportionately." Think of it this way:
DC is 61.4 square miles, while the DC metro area is 5,564.6 square miles. That means that DC occupies 1.1% of the metro area's land.
DC's population has grown by 44,726 since 2010, while the metro area's population has increased by 313,627. As a result, DC is absorbing 14.3% the region's population growth, but within just 1.1% of area in a city that contains only 10.9% of the metro area's total population.
Most of the people who may have flocked to the DC metro area due to the aftermath of the great recession looking for jobs did so primarily outside of DC proper. From July 2008 to July 2009, DC captured 12.2% of the region's growth but from July 2009 to July 2010, DC's percentage of the region's growth dramatically dropped to 6.8% and then from July 2010 to July 2011, DC's percentage of the region's growth rebounded to 13.7%. This blip may be indicative of the big regional surge people often refer to, but that surge happened mostly outside of DC's confines. The regional growth rate is returning back to pre-recession levels now.
So in other words, when the region's booming, the suburbs "win," and win it's not the city wins?
That's not too surprising. The type of people moving to the District will usually be less affected by economic downturn/slower job growth than people in the region at large. Stagnant job growth in the region doesn't really impact the hiring of major law firms. The editor of the Columbia Law Review will have a job no matter what.
The suburbs/exurbs are different. Those people are more economically vulnerable. When times get tough, it's always the IT staff/admin support, etc. that get put on the chopping block first. If there are fewer of those jobs being created in the region, then fewer of those people are going to move to the region.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
